Search

This article outlines the value of administrative data for family justice research. Although socio-legal scholars have extended their research beyond purely theoretical or doctrinal analyses, studies using large-scale digital datasets remain few in number. As new opportunities arise to link large-scale administrative datasets across health, education, welfare and justice, it is vital that the community of family justice researchers and analysts are supported to deliver research based on entire service or family court populations. In this context, this article provides a definition of administrative data, before outlining the potential of single, linked or blended administrative data sets for family justice research. The remaining sections of the article speak to questions that are pertinent to this particular academic community, including the distinctive contribution of the socio-legal scholar to interdisciplinary teams and the place of data providers in collaborative research. Drawing on the sociological concept of 'publics', the final section considers the multiple interest groups whose social licence must be secured, when personal records are used to understand the relationship between law and family life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This review determined the most commonly used, and reliable, measures for assessing clinical outcomes for multiple sclerosis (MS). Objectives: It was anticipated that this would facilitate the development of a common set of metrics, and aid reaching a consensus regarding the outcome measures that are typically used in the field of MS clinical research. Major findings: A thorough literature review of clinical outcome measures for MS produced 166 measures that have been used in this context. This list was then refined by discussion with a panel of consultant neurologists, which reduced the list to 23 commonly employed tools. This shortlist was then further refined through surveying 41 centres for MS treatment, which reduced the shortlist to 16 measures. The properties of these scales, in terms of their symptom/function domains, their specificity for MS, their administration characteristics, and their reliability and validity for MS, are all discussed. Conclusions: Conclusions regarding the development of potential sets of assessment measures for MS, which encompass broad symptom/function domains, and which are sensitive to the practical requirements of administration within clinical contexts, are explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]